Pro&Con: Right-to-work laws encourage freeloaders, lower wages and create no new work

"Right-to-work" laws confer no rights and create no work — they're an attempt by employers and the politicians they bankroll to keep workers unorganized, unrepresented and underpaid.

Comment

By Don Kusler

southcoasttoday.com

By Don Kusler

Posted Jan. 5, 2013 at 12:01 AM

By Don Kusler
Posted Jan. 5, 2013 at 12:01 AM

» Social News

"Right-to-work" laws confer no rights and create no work — they're an attempt by employers and the politicians they bankroll to keep workers unorganized, unrepresented and underpaid.

Nevertheless, the lame-duck Republican legislature in Michigan recently passed a so-called "right-to-work" law, which was instantly signed by the governor. Here's why that was a big mistake for Michigan's workers and economy.

"Right-to-work" proponents claim to be fighting "forced unionism." But under current federal law, no worker is required to join a labor union.

That same federal law, however, requires unions to represent everyone at a given workplace — member or not — in contract negotiations and in settling work-related problems with employers.

Since it's obviously not fair for dues-paying union members to pick up the tab for services provided to nonunion members, nonmembers are sometimes charged a service, or "agency," fee. None of the money collected in agency fees can be used for political, social or any other activities besides employment representation.

So in reality "right-to-work" is "right-to-freeload" — to get a very valuable service, union representation, without paying for it.

And make no mistake: union representation is valuable. Through hard bargaining over many decades for higher pay, better working conditions and greater dignity at work, unions helped create the great American middle class. They've been the only real curb on the concentration of economic and political power in this country.

As proof, consider that as labor has declined in influence in the last few decades under fierce attack by big money interests, we've seen the progress of the middle class stalled and the nation's wealth gap widen.

But because unions still do a good enough job of making sure the economy works for their middle-class members, the economic elite would like them completely destroyed. "Right to work" is their favored tool.

And it's effective. After all, if workers can get free union services under "right-to-work" laws, why would anyone pay dues? As dues decline, so does the strength of the union, until it finally disappears.

Believers in the free market should be offended by "right-to-work" laws. They interpose the power of the state between the employer and the union by forbidding them to freely enter into an agreement on the kind of "union security clause" that creates the nonmember agency fee. In other words, it makes it illegal for the agreement to require employees to pay their fair share of representation.

Proponents of so-called "right-to-work" laws argue that enactment will lead to economic growth through a more business-friendly environment. Study after study has found this claim to be untrue.

For example, a 2011 study by Gordon Lafer of the University of Oregon and Sylvia Allegretto of the University of California at Berkeley found that "right-to-work" laws have not positively impacted job growth.

One part of the study examined the economic climate in Oklahoma after the 2001 passage of "right-to-work." The study found that unemployment had doubled in Oklahoma since enactment and that new business arrivals had actually declined.

The study also found that the lower wages and economic insecurity of workers in "right-to-work" states could make business less inclined to relocate because of declining tax revenues and consumer demand.

Studies like this and a simple comparison of employment rates and wages between "right-to-work" states and non-"right-to-work" states makes it fairly certain that Michigan will not reap any economic rewards from the new law.

Instead, it represents a step backward that the state cannot afford. Until we and our elected officials come to grips with the fact that a race-to-the-bottom has no winners, workers and the economy will continue to suffer from the short-sightedness of the misnamed "right-to-work" movement.